Literature DB >> 31427586

Comprehensive analysis of syndromic hearing loss patients in Japan.

Michie Ideura1, Shin-Ya Nishio1,2, Hideaki Moteki1,2, Yutaka Takumi1, Maiko Miyagawa1, Teruyuki Sato3, Yumiko Kobayashi4, Kenji Ohyama5, Kiyoshi Oda5, Takamichi Matsui6, Tsukasa Ito7, Hiroshi Suzumura8, Kyoko Nagai9, Shuji Izumi10, Nobuhiro Nishiyama11, Manabu Komori12, Kozo Kumakawa13, Hidehiko Takeda13, Yoko Kishimoto14, Satoshi Iwasaki15, Sakiko Furutate15, Kotaro Ishikawa16, Masato Fujioka17, Hiroshi Nakanishi18, Jun Nakayama19, Rie Horie20, Yumi Ohta21, Yasushi Naito22, Mariko Kakudo23, Hirofumi Sakaguchi24, Yuko Kataoka25, Kazuma Sugahara26, Naohito Hato27, Takashi Nakagawa28, Nana Tsuchihashi28, Yukihiko Kanda29, Chiharu Kihara30, Tetsuya Tono31, Ikuyo Miyanohara32, Akira Ganaha33, Shin-Ichi Usami34,35.   

Abstract

More than 400 syndromes associated with hearing loss and other symptoms have been described, corresponding to 30% of cases of hereditary hearing loss. In this study we aimed to clarify the mutation spectrum of syndromic hearing loss patients in Japan by using next-generation sequencing analysis with a multiple syndromic targeted resequencing panel (36 target genes). We analyzed single nucleotide variants, small insertions, deletions and copy number variations in the target genes. We enrolled 140 patients with any of 14 syndromes (BOR syndrome, Waardenburg syndrome, osteogenesis imperfecta, spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita, Stickler syndrome, CHARGE syndrome, Jervell and Lange-Nielsen syndrome, Pendred syndrome, Klippel-Feil syndrome, Alport syndrome, Norrie disease, Treacher-Collins syndrome, Perrault syndrome and auditory neuropathy with optic atrophy) and identified the causative variants in 56% of the patients. This analysis could identify the causative variants in syndromic hearing loss patients in a short time with a high diagnostic rate. In addition, it was useful for the analysis of the cases who only partially fulfilled the diagnostic criteria.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31427586      PMCID: PMC6700179          DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-47141-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


Introduction

Congenital hearing loss is one of the most common sensory disorders, affecting one out of 500–1000 newborns. Over half of the cases of congenital or early onset sensorineural hearing loss are estimated to be caused by genetic factors[1], with 30% of these hereditary hearing loss patients affected by various syndromes. More than 400 syndromes associated with hearing loss and other symptoms have been described[2]. The most commonly observed syndromes in clinical settings include Pendred syndrome, BOR syndrome, Waardenburg syndrome, osteogenesis imperfecta, Stickler syndrome, spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita, CHARGE syndrome, Klippel-Feil syndrome, Alport syndrome, Treacher-Collins syndrome, Jervell Lange-Nielsen syndrome, Perrault syndrome, Norrie disease, and auditory neuropathy with optic atrophy. The clinical characteristics and responsible genes for these 14 syndromes are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1

The clinical characteristics and responsible genes for 14 types of syndromic hearing loss.

SyndromeOMIM#PrevalenceGene and inheritanceClinical featuresReference
Branchio-oto-renal (BOR) syndrome113650, 602588, 608389, 6108961:40,000EYA1 (AD), SIX1 (AD), SIX5 (AD)hearing loss, branchial anomalies, preauricular pits, renal anomalies, anomalies of the external, middle, inner ear, and others [3, 4]
Waardenburg syndrome (WS) type 11935001:20,000–40,000 for all types of WSPAX3 (AD)hearing loss, pigmentation disturbances of the hair, skin and eyes, dystopia canthorum [59]
Waardenburg syndrome (WS) type 2193510, 608890, 611584MITF (AD), SNAI2 (AR), SOX10 (AD), EDNRB (AD),hearing loss, pigmentation disturbances of the hair, skin and eyes [59]
Waardenburg syndrome (WS) type 3148820PAX3 (AD)hearing loss, pigmentation disturbances of the hair, skin and eyes, dystopia canthorum, upper limb abnormalities [59]
Waardenburg syndrome (WS) type 4277580, 613265, 613266EDNRB (AD/AR), EDN3 (AD/AR), SOX10 (AD),hearing loss, pigmentation disturbances of the hair, skin and eyes, Hirschsprung disease [59]
Osteogenesis imperfecta166200, 166210, 259420, 1662201:15,000–20,000COL1A1 (AD), COL1A2 (AD)hearing loss, multiple bone fractures, blue sclera, otosclerosis [10]
Spondyloepiphyseal displasia congenita183900unknownCOL2A1 (AD)hearing loss, short stature, abnormal epiphyses, flattened body [11]
Stickler syndrome108300, 604841, 614134, 6142841:7,500–9,000COL2A1 (AD), COL11A1 (AD), COL9A1 (AR), COL9A2 (AR), COL9A3 (AR)hearing loss, cleft palate, midfacial hypoplasia, arthritis, eye sympton (myopia, retinal retachment) [1216]
Stickler syndrome (non-ocular type)unknownCOL11A2 (AD/AR)hearing loss, cleft palate, midfacial hypoplasia, arthritis [12, 17]
Alport syndrome301050, 203780, 1042001:50,000COL4A5 (XLD), COL4A3 (AD/AR), COL4A4 (AR)hearing loss, eye sympton, renal dysfunction [1820]
CHARGE syndrome2148001:8,500–10,000CHD7 (AD), SEMA3E (AD)hearing loss/ear anomalies, coloboma, heart defect, choanal atresia, retarded growth and development, genital hypoplasia [2124]
Jervell and Lange-Nielsen syndrome220400, 6123471:200,000KCNQ1 (AR), KCNE1 (AR)hearing loss, a long QT interval with torsade de pointes on an electrocardiogram [25, 26]
Pendred syndrome2746001:10,000–13,000SLC26A4 (AR)hearing loss, goiter, enlarged vestibular aqueduct [27]
Klippel-Feil syndrome118100, 2143001:40,000–42,000GDF6 (AD), MEOX1 (AR), GDF3 (AD), MYO18B (AR)hearing loss, short neck (fusion of cevicalvertebrae), low posterior hairline [59]
Auditory neuropathy with optic atrophyunknownOPA1 (AD)hearing loss, visual impairment (optic atrophy) [60]
Treacher-Collins syndrome154500, 2483901:50,000TCOF1 (AD), POLR1D (AD/AR), POLR1C (AR)hearing loss malformations of ear, eye, and mandibula
Norrie disease310600unknownNDP (AR)hearing loss, eye symptoms (pseudoglioma, blindness), mental retardation
Perrault syndrome233400, 614926, 614129, 615300unknownHSD17B4 (AR), HARS2 (AR), CLPP (AR), LARS2 (AR), TWNK (AR), ERAL1 (AR)hearing loss, ovarian dysgenesis (in females)

AD: Autosomal dominant, AR: Autosomal recessive, XLD: X-linked dominant. Responsible genes, prevalence, inheritance and clinical feature informations were obtained from OMIM database (https://www.omim.org), GeneReviews®, StatPearls and each reference.

The clinical characteristics and responsible genes for 14 types of syndromic hearing loss. AD: Autosomal dominant, AR: Autosomal recessive, XLD: X-linked dominant. Responsible genes, prevalence, inheritance and clinical feature informations were obtained from OMIM database (https://www.omim.org), GeneReviews®, StatPearls and each reference. Branchio-Oto-Renal (BOR) syndrome (OMIM#113650 and #610896) or Branchio-Oto (BO) syndrome (OMIM#602588 and 608389) is characterized by the association of the branchial arch, external ear anomalies, hearing impairment and renal anomalies. BO/BOR syndrome is observed in one out of 40,000 children, and in 2% of profoundly deaf children[3,4]. Waardenburg syndrome (WS1 OMIM#193500, WS2 OMIM#193510, #608890 and #611584, WS3 OMIM#148820, WS4 OMIM#277580, #613265 and #613266) is characterized by varying degrees of hearing impairment and pigmentation disturbances in the hair, skin and eyes[5,6]. WS is classified into four types based on clinical findings. The frequency of WS is 1/20,000–40,000 newborns[5-9]. Osteogenesis imperfecta type 1 (OMIM#166200) is an autosomal dominant inheritance disorder characterized by fractures with minimal or no trauma, blue sclera, hearing loss and otosclerosis[10]. Spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita (OMIM#183900) is an autosomal dominantly inherited chondrodysplasia characterized by a disproportionately short stature (short trunk), abnormal epiphyses and flattened vertebral bodies[11]. Stickler syndrome (OMIM#108300, #604841, #614134 and #614284) is an inherited connective tissue disorder associated with myopia, retinal detachment, cleft palate, midfacial hypoplasia, arthritis and hearing impairment[12-17]. Alport syndrome (OMIM#301050, #203780 and #104200) is a progressive disease associated with glomerulonephritis, sensorineural hearing loss, and ocular complications caused by abnormalities in type IV collagen[18-20]. CHARGE syndrome (OMIM#214800) is an autosomal dominant disorder characterized by congenital multiple anomalies (coloboma, heart defect, choanal atresia, retarded growth and development, genital hypoplasia and ear anomalies/deafness)[21-24]. Jervell and Lange-Nielsen syndrome (OMIM#220400 and #612347) is a rare autosomal recessive cardio-auditory disorder characterized by congenital profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss and a long QT interval with arrhythmia (torsade de pointes)[25,26] Pendred syndrome (OMIM#274600) is an autosomal recessive disorder characterized by congenital hearing loss, goiter, and enlarged vestibular aqueduct[27]. In this study, we conducted a comprehensive analysis of 140 Japanese syndromic hearing loss patients to obtain the mutation spectrums and clinical features by using next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis with a multiple syndromic targeted resequencing panel.

Results

As shown in Table 2, we performed NGS analysis of 36 previously reported genes associated with syndromic hearing loss for 140 probands and identified the causative gene variants in 79 probands (56%). The diagnostic rate by syndrome was 32% (19/59) for BOR syndrome, 78% (18/23) for Waardenburg syndrome, 60% (3/5) for osteogenesis imperfecta, 100% (3/3) for Stickler syndrome, and 89% (32/36) for Pendred syndrome. On the other hand, we could not detect any causative gene variants for Klippel-Feil syndrome, Alport syndrome or Norrie disease cases.
Table 2

Subjects and diagnostic ratio in this study.

Clinical diagnosisProbandsGenetic diagnosisDiagnostic rate
Branchio-oto-renal syndrome59EYA1: 18 cases, SIX1: 1 case32%
Waardenburg syndrome 15PAX3: 2 cases, MITF: 1 case, SOX10: 1 case80%
Waardenburg syndrome 214MITF: 4 cases, SOX10: 5 cases, EDNRB: 1 case71%
Waardenburg syndrome (unclassifiable WS1 or WS2)2PAX3: 2 cases100%
Waardenburg syndrome 42SOX10: 2 cases100%
Osteogenesis imperfecta5COL1A1: 3 cases60%
Stickler syndrome3COL11A1: 2 cases, COL11A2: 1 case100%
Spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita1COL2A1: 1 case100%
CHARGE syndrome3CHD7: 1 case33%
Jervell and Lange-Nielsen syndrome1KCNQ1(compound heterozygous): 1 case100%
Pendred syndrome36SLC26A4(compound heterozygous or homozygous): 32 cases89%
Klippel-Feil syndrome30%
Alport syndrome40%
Treacher-Collins syndrome0NA
Norrie disease10%
Perrault syndrome0NA
Auditory neuropathy with optic atrophy1OPA1: 1 case100%
Total1407956%
Subjects and diagnostic ratio in this study.

Mutation spectrum and clinical features of BOR syndrome patients

We conducted genetic analysis of 59 probands with clinical findings of BO/BOR syndrome (16 typical cases, 43 atypical cases, Supplementary Table S1), and identified causative heterozygous variants in 19 probands (diagnostic rate 32%). We identified the causative variants in 12/16 typical cases, but the causative variants were identified in only 7/43 atypical cases. Table 3 summarizes the identified variants and clinical features of the probands and all affected family members for 18 families with EYA1 mutations, and one family with a SIX1 mutation. There were no BO/BOR cases caused by the SIX5 gene variant. Among the 12 EYA1 variants, 8 were truncating variants (five were nonsense, one was frameshift, two were splice site), three were missense variants and one was a copy number variation (one copy number loss). Four of them were novel variants and 8 of them were previously reported. JHLB4043 had one copy loss detected using NGS read depth data, which seemed to be deleted in all of the EYA1 gene, confirmed by array Comparative Genomic Hybridization (aCGH). The mutations identified in this study were located in exon 6 to exon 13, and frequently observed in exon 8 and exon 12. Two or more cases carried the same variants (p.R264X, p.R275X, c.867 + 5 G > A, p.R328X and p.R407Q). EYA1 variants were mainly identified from autosomal dominant families (10/18 cases); however, we also identified variants from 7 sporadic cases. Among them we confirmed de novo mutations in four families (Supplementary Fig. S1). The case with a SIX1 mutation was also caused by de novo mutation (Supplementary Fig. S1). In terms of the clinical features of all BO/BOR-affected patients with EYA1 and SIX1 gene variants (19 probands and their family members who carried the same variants; 34 patients in total), the most frequent symptom was hearing loss (31/ 32, 97%). Unilateral hearing loss was observed in 2 cases. The most frequent type of hearing loss was moderate mixed hearing loss. Middle and/or inner ear anomalies were observed in 22 of 23 cases who underwent CT imaging (96%). Twenty-seven of 31 cases had preauricular pits (87%), and 14 of 25 cases for whom information was available had branchial anomalies (56%). Renal anomalies, on the other hand, were revealed in only one of 7 cases for whom kidney abnormalities were examined (14%). It is noteworthy that there were only a limited number of cases (7/34) with renal ultrasonographic information available in our cohort, thus the frequencies of renal anomalies may be underestimated. The presence of branchial or renal anomalies was not correlated with the severity of hearing loss. Furthermore, no relationship was found between genotype and clinical findings. As rare symptoms, one patient had hemifacial palsy, and 3 cases had eye symptoms.
Table 3

Genetic diagnosis results and clinical features of BO/BOR syndrome patients and family members.

ProbandFamilyTypeNucleotide changeAmino Acid changeLocationHereditary formSeverity of hearing lossPreauricular pitsCervical fistulaEar marformationRenal anomalyOther clinical featuresreference
Rt.earLt.earInner earMiddle earExternal ear
JHLB-6679probandtypicalEYA1: c. [489T > G]; [=]p.[Y163X];[=]exon 6ADmoderatemoderate++++this study
fatheratypicalEYA1: c. [489T > G]; [=]p.[Y163X];[=]exon 6moderatemoderate+NANANA
brotherNAEYA1: c. [489T > G]; [=]p.[Y163X];[=]exon 6NANANANANANANANANA
motherunaffectedEYA1: c. [=]; [=]normalnormalNANANANANA
JHLB346probandtypicalEYA1: c. [790C > T]; [=]p.[R264X];[=]exon 8ADmildnormal++NANANANANARickard (2000), Fukuda (2001)
JHLB3868probandatypicalEYA1: c. [790C > T]; [=]p.[R264X];[=]exon 8ADmoderate(COR)++NANANARickard (2000), Fukuda (2001)
grandfathertypicalEYA1: c. [790C > T]; [=]p.[R264X];[=]exon 8moderateprofound++NANANANA
mothertypicalEYA1: c. [790C > T]; [=]p.[R264X];[=]exon 8moderatemoderate++NANANANA
fatherunaffectedEYA1: c. [=]; [=]NANANANANANANA
grandmotherunaffectedEYA1: c. [=]; [=]NANANANANANANA
#4107probandtypicalEYA1: c.[823C > T]; [=]p.[R275X];[=]exon 8ADmoderatemild+NA++NANAAbdelhak (1997), Orten (2008)
motheratypicalEYA1: c.[823C > T]; [=]p.[R275X];[=]exon 8profoundmoderateNA+NA+NANA
JHLB2279probandtypicalEYA1: c. [823C > T]; [=]p.[R275X];[=]exon 8sporadic (de novo)moderatemoderate++++NAAbdelhak (1997), Orten (2008)
fatherunaffectedEYA1: c. [=]; [=]NANANANANANANA
motherunaffectedEYA1: c. [=]; [=]NANANANANANANA
#371probandatypicalEYA1: c.[867 + 5G > A];[=]intron 8sporadicmildprofound+NANANANAStockley (2008)
JHLB4689probandtypicalEYA1: c.[867+5G > A]; [=]intron 8ADmoderatemoderate++NA+NANAStockley (2008)
brotheratypicalEYA1: c.[867+5G > A]; [=]intron 8moderatemoderate+NANA+NANA
motheratypicalEYA1: c.[867+5G > A]; [=]intron 8mildmild+NANANANANANA
grandmotheratypicalEYA1: c.[867+5 G > A]; [=]intron 8profoundsevereNANANANANA
JHLB2062probandatypicalEYA1: c. [982 C > T]; [=]p.[R328X];[=]exon 10sporadic (de novo)profoundprofound+NA+NANAvision Zimpair-mentSpruijt (2006), Olavarrieta (2008)
fatherunaffectedEYA1: c. [=]; [=]NANANANANANANANANA
motherunaffectedEYA1: c. [=]; [=]NANANANANANANANANA
JHLB2922probandtypicalEYA1: c. [982 C > T]; [=]p.[R328X];[=]exon 10sporadicmoderatemoderate++++NANASpruijt (2006), Olavarrieta (2008)
JHLB3360probandtypicalEYA1: c. [982C > T]; [=]p.[R328X];[=]exon 10ADnormalnormal++NANA+Spruijt (2006), Olavarrieta (2008)
motheratypicalEYA1: c. [982C > T]; [=]p.[R328X];[=]exon 10profoundprofound+NANANANA
JHLB975probandatypicalEYA1: c. [1090C > T]; [=]p.[Q364X];[=]exon 11NANANA+NA+NANANANAthis study
JHLB3266probandatypicalEYA1: c. [1101-1G > A]; [=]intron 11ADseveresevere++NANANAamblyopia. hyperopiaRetterer (2016)
motheratypicalEYA1: c. [1101-1G > A]; [=]intron 11severeprofoundNANANANAhyperopia
uncleatypicalEYA1: c. [1101-1G > A]; [=]intron 11severeprofound+NANANANA
JHLB2645probandtypicalEYA1: c. [1155_1156delAT]; [=]p. [L385fs];[=]exon 12sporadic (de novo)severemoderate++++NANAthis study
fatherunaffectedEYA1: c. [=]; [=]NANANANANANANANANA
motherunaffectedEYA1: c. [=]; [=]NANANANANANANANANA
sisterunaffectedEYA1: c. [=]; [=]NANANANANANANANANA
#4361probandtypicalEYA1: c. [1187A > G]; [=]p.[D396G];[=]exon 12ADprofoundsevere+++NANANANamba (2001)
daughteratypicalEYA1: c. [1187A > G]; [=]p.[D396G];[=]exon 12normalprofound+NANANANANANA
#4079probandatypicalEYA1: c.[1220G > A]; [=]p.[R407Q];[=]exon 12sporadic (de novo)mildmoderate++NANANAChang (2004)
fatherunaffectedEYA1: c. [=]; [=]NANANANANANANANANA
motherunaffectedEYA1: c. [=]; [=]NANANANANANANANANA
JHLB2233probandtypicalEYA1: c. [1220G > A]; [=]p.[R407Q];[=]exon 12ADsevere(COR)+++NAChang (2004)
mothertypicalEYA1: c. [1220G > A]; [=]p.[R407Q];[=]exon 12profoundmoderate+++++facial palsy
JHLB2717probandatypicalEYA1: c. [1376G > C]; [=]p.[R459P];[=]exon 13sporadicseveresevereNA++NANANAOrten (2008)
JHLB4043probandtypicalEYA1: c.(?_72111486_72268810_?)CNVADprofoundprofound++++NA this study
brothertypicalEYA1: c.(?_72111486_72268810_?)CNVmoderatemoderate++++NA
fathertypicalEYA1: c.(?_72111486_72268810_?)CNVprofoundsevere+++NA
JHLB660probandtypicalSIX1: c.[519G > C]; [=]p. [K173N];[=]exon 1sporadic (de novo)profound(COR)+NA++NAUnzaki (2018)
fatherunaffectedSIX1: c.[=]; [=]NANANANANANANANANA
motherunaffectedSIX1: c.[=]; [=]NANANANANANANANANA

AD: Autosomal dominant, COR: Conditioned orientation response audiometry.

The reference cDNA sequences NM_172060 for EYA1 and NM_005982 for SIX1.

Genetic diagnosis results and clinical features of BO/BOR syndrome patients and family members. AD: Autosomal dominant, COR: Conditioned orientation response audiometry. The reference cDNA sequences NM_172060 for EYA1 and NM_005982 for SIX1.

Mutation spectrum and clinical features of Waardenburg syndrome patients

We conducted genetic analysis of 23 probands with hearing loss and one or more clinical findings typical of Waardenburg syndrome, and identified the causative heterozygous variants in 18 probands (diagnostic rate 78%). Table 4 and Supplementary Fig. S2 provides a summary of the identified variants and clinical features of probands and all family members (four families with PAX3 mutations, five families with MITF mutations, 8 families with SOX10 mutations, and one family with a EDNRB mutation). No pathogenic variants were found in SNAI2 or EDN3. Most of the identified variants were truncating variants (four were nonsense, 7 were frameshift, one was splice site) and only three cases had missense variants, one each in PAX3, MITF and SOX10. In addition, we also identified three cases with one copy number loss of the SOX10 gene identified from NGS read depth data and confirmed by aCGH. Thirteen variants were novel and five variants (three PAX3 mutations, and one each with MITF and SOX10 mutations) were previously reported. Computer prediction scores, allele frequency information and the pathogenicity classification for novel variants are listed in Supplementary Table S2. Autosomal dominant inherited cases were 2/4 in PAX3 cases, 4/5 in MITF cases, 1/8 in SOX10 cases, and 1/1 in EDNRB cases. The other 10 cases were sporadic cases, with confirmed de novo mutations in SOX10 in five cases (Table 4). In terms of the clinical features of the probands and all family members harboring the same causative gene variants (29 patients from 18 families in total), the most frequent symptom was hearing loss (27/29, 93%), followed by heterochromia iridis (23/28, 82%). The severity of hearing loss for each gene is shown in Fig. 1, with the frequency of the profound hearing loss higher in cases with MITF and SOX10 mutations. Two cases with PAX3 mutations had bilateral normal hearing and three cases with MITF mutations had unilateral hearing loss. Only a limited number of patients showed discoloration of the hair and skin: hair discoloration was seen in two cases (with SOX10 and MITF mutations), leukoderma in one case with a SOX10 mutation, and excessive freckles in three cases with MITF mutations. No abnormal musculoskeletal findings were observed in any case. Dystopia canthorum was seen in two cases with PAX3 mutations, and one each with MITF and SOX10 mutations. The other associated symptoms observed in SOX10 cases were ptosis (JHLB4270, JHLB4310), developmental delay (JHLB4310) and Asperger syndrome (JHLB3480). In addition, inner ear anomalies, including hypoplasia of the semicircular canal, cochlea, cochlear nerve, and saccular vestibule, were observed. It is suggested that there is no obvious correlation between the type of mutation and its location and the severity of the symptoms. Most of the clinical findings for cases associated with each gene were in agreement with previous reports; however, we identified phenotype-genotype disagreement in two Waardenburg syndrome 1 (WS1) cases (JHLB2469 with a MITF mutation and JHLB5132 with a SOX10 mutation).
Table 4

Genetic diagnosis results and clinical features of Waardenburg syndrome patients and family members.

Clinical diagnostic typeProbandFamilyNucleotidechangeAmino Acid changeLocationHereditary formSeverity of hearing lossDystopia canthorumHeterochromiaOther clinical featuresReference
Rt.earLt.ear
WS1JHLB1588probandPAX3: c.[667C > T];[=]p.[R223X];[=]exon 5sporadicmoderate(COR)++Baldwin (1994)
JHLB1655probandPAX3:c. [792+1G > A];[=]intron 5ADprofound(COR)++Wollnik (2003)
father (U)PAX3:c. [792+1G > A];[=]intron 5normalnormal
JHLB2469probandMITF: c.[332C > T];[=]p.[A111V];[=]exon 3sporadicnormalsevere++Chen (2010)
JHLB5132probandSOX10: c.(38369847_38379751_?)delCNVADprofoundprofound++this study
grandfatherSOX10: c.(38369847_38379751_?)delCNVNANANA+
motherSOX10: c.(38369847_38379751_?)delCNVNANANANA
father (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]NANANANA
brother (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]normalnormalNANA
grandmother (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]NANANANA
WS2JHLB2091probandMITF: c.[326dupC];[=]p.[S109fs];[=]exon 3ADprofound(COR)+this study
brotherMITF: c.[326dupC];[=]p.[S109fs];[=]exon 3profound(COR)+
motherMITF: c.[326dupC];[=]p.[S109fs];[=]exon 3profoundprofoundHD, FR
father (U)MITF: c.[=];[=]p.[=];[=]profoundprofoundNA
JHLB1623probandMITF: c.[389_399del];[=]p.[Y130fs];[=]exon 4ADprofoundprofound+FRthis study
fatherMITF: c.[389_399del];[=]p.[Y130fs];[=]exon 4profoundnormalFR
brotherMITF: c.[389_399del];[=]p.[Y130fs];[=]exon 4severesevere
mother (U)MITF: c.[=];[=]p.[=];[=]normalnormal
JHLB1593probandMITF: c.[550G > T];[=]p.[E184X];[=]exon 5ADseveresevere+this study
motherMITF: c.[550G > T];[=]p.[E184X];[=]exon 5profoundprofound+
JHLB3463probandMITF: c.[796G > T];[=]p.[E266X];[=]exon 8ADprofoundprofound+this study
motherMITF: c.[796G > T];[=]p.[E266X];[=]exon 8normalprofound+
JHLB175probandSOX10: c.[400_417del];[=]p.[L134fs];[=]exon 2sporadic (de novo)profoundprofound+HD, MAthis study
father (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]p.[=];[=]normalnormalNA
mother (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]p.[=];[=]normalnormalNA
JHLB1632probandSOX10: c.[426G > C];[=]p.[W142C];[=]exon 2sporadicprofoundprofound+this study
mother (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]p.[=];[=]NANANA
JHLB4310probandSOX10: c.[1195C > T];[=]p.[Q399X];[=]exon 4sporadic (de novo)profoundprofoundMA, PT, MRzazo seco (2017)
father (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]p.[=];[=]NANANANANA
mother (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]p.[=];[=]NANANANANA
JHLB177probandSOX10: c.(?_38369393_38379751_?)delCNVsporadic (de novo)profoundprofound+MAthis study
father (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]NANA
mother (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]NANA
JHLB3086probandSOX10: c.(?_38369393_38379751_?)delCNVsporadic (de novo)moderate(COR)+SD, MAthis study
father (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]NANANA
mother (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]NANANA
JHLB2550probandEDNRB: c.[223delG];[=]p.[D75fs];[=]ADmoderatesevere+this study
motherEDNRB: c.[223delG];[=]p.[D75fs];[=]unilateralNA+
Unclassifiable (WS1 or WS2)JHLB3591probandPAX3: c.[318delC];[=]p.[P106fs];[=]exon 2sporadicprofoundprofoundNA+this study
JHLB2343probandPAX3: c.[812G > A];[=]p.[R271H];[=]exon 6ADsevere(COR)NA+Tassabehji (1995)
fatherPAX3: c.[812G > A];[=]p.[R271H];[=]exon 6normalnormalNA+
mother (U)PAX3: c.[=];[=]p.[=];[=]NANANA
WS4JHLB4270probandSOX10: c.[781_793del];[=]p.[R261fs];[=]exon 4sporadicseveresevere+HI, PTthis study
JHLB3480probandSOX10: c.[859delT];[=]p.[S287fs];[=]exon 4sporadic (de novo)severesevere+HI, MA, ASthis study
father (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]p.[=];[=]normalnormalNA
mother (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]p.[=];[=]normalnormalNA
sister (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]p.[=];[=]normalnormalNA
sister (U)SOX10: c.[=];[=]p.[=];[=]normalnormalNA

U: Unaffected family member, AD: Autosomal dominant, CNV: Copy number variation, COR: Conditioned orientation audiometory.

HD: Hair discoloration, SD: Skin discoloration, FR: Freckles, HI: Hirschsprung disease, MA: Malformation of inner ear, PT: Ptosis, MR: Mental retardation, AS: Asperger syndrome.

The reference cDNA sequences NM_181457 for PAX3, NM_000248 for MITF, NM_006941 for SOX10, NM_000115 for EDNRB.

Figure 1

The degree of hearing loss for all family members harboring causative variants. We calculated the hearing threshold in the worse hearing ear. Unilateral hearing loss: MITF 3 cases, EDNRB 1 case.

Genetic diagnosis results and clinical features of Waardenburg syndrome patients and family members. U: Unaffected family member, AD: Autosomal dominant, CNV: Copy number variation, COR: Conditioned orientation audiometory. HD: Hair discoloration, SD: Skin discoloration, FR: Freckles, HI: Hirschsprung disease, MA: Malformation of inner ear, PT: Ptosis, MR: Mental retardation, AS: Asperger syndrome. The reference cDNA sequences NM_181457 for PAX3, NM_000248 for MITF, NM_006941 for SOX10, NM_000115 for EDNRB. The degree of hearing loss for all family members harboring causative variants. We calculated the hearing threshold in the worse hearing ear. Unilateral hearing loss: MITF 3 cases, EDNRB 1 case.

Mutation spectrum and clinical features of other syndromic hearing loss patients

We also conducted genetic analysis of other syndromic hearing loss patients (five osteogenesis imperfecta cases, one spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita case, three Stickler syndrome cases, three CHARGE syndrome cases, one Jervell and Lange-Nielsen syndrome case, one auditory neuropathy with optic atrophy case, and 36 Pendred syndrome cases). The diagnostic rate for each syndrome was 60% for osteogenesis imperfecta with COL1A1 variants (3/5), 100% for spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita with a COL2A1 variant (1/1), 100% for Stickler syndrome with COL11A1, COL11A2 variants (2/3, 1/3), 33% for CHARGE syndrome with a CHD7 variant (1/3), 100% for Jervell and Lange-Nielsen syndrome with a KCNQ1 variant (1/1), 100% for auditory neuropathy with a OPA1 mutation (1/1), and 89% for Pendred syndrome with SLC26A4 variants (32/36). Tables 5, 6 provide summaries of the identified variants and clinical features of the probands and all family members harboring the same variants (the pedigrees and audiograms of these cases are shown in Supplementary Figs S3, S4). The identified variants in all three probands with osteogenesis imperfecta were previously reported truncating variants. All four affected cases had easily fractured bones, blue sclera and hearing loss. The severity of hearing loss varied from mild to severe with air-bone gap. All three probands were from autosomal dominant families.
Table 5

Genetic diagnosis results and clinical features of osteogenesis imperfecta, spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita, Stickler syndrome, Jervell Lange-Nielsen syndrome and auditory neuropathy with optic atrophy patients and family members.

ProbandFamilyNucleotide changeAmino Acid changeLocationHereditary formSeverity of hering lossOther Clinical FeaturesReference
Rt.earLt.ear
Osteogenesis imperfecta
JHLB459probandCOL1A1:c.[903 + 1 G > A];[=]intron 14ADmoderatemildeasy fracture、blue scleraSchleit (2015)
JHLB-3127probandCOL1A1:c.[1414 C > T];[=]p[R472X];[=]exon 21ADprofoundprofoundeasy fracture、blue scleraPollitt (2006)
motherCOL1A1:c.[1414 C > T];[=]p[R472X];[=]exon 21severeprofoundeasy fracture、blue sclera
fatherCOL1A1:c.[=];[=]p[=];[=]normalnormal
JHLB325probandCOL1A1:c.[2127 + 2 T > A];[=]intron 31ADnormalmoderateblue sclera, otosclerosis, easy fractureShaheen (2012)
Spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita
JHLB1192probandCOL2A1:c.[3198_3206del];[=]p.[1066_1069del.];[=]exon 46ADprofoundprofoundcleft palate, short stature, short extremitiesthis study
fatherCOL2A1:c.[3198_3206del];[=]p.[1066_1069del.];[=]exon 46moderateseverecleft palate, short stature, short extremities
motherCOL2A1:c.[=];[=]p[=];[=]NANA
Stickler syndrome
JHLB4194probandCOL11A1:c.[1737 + 2 T > C];[=]intron 17ADmildmildcleft palate,myopia (congenital)this study
motherCOL11A1:c.[1737 + 2 T > C];[=]intron 17mildmildcleft palate,myopia (congenital,mild)
father (U)COL11A1:c.[=];[=]normalnormal
JHLB4190probandCOL11A1:c.[3117_3152del];[=]p.[1039_1051del];[=]exon 41spoadic(de novo)mildmildcleft palate,myopia (congenital)this study
father (U)COL11A1:c.[=];[=]normalnormal
mother (U)COL11A1:c.[=];[=]normalnormal
brother (U)COL11A1:c.[=];[=]normalnormal
JHLB4181probandCOL11A2:c.[4392 + 1 G > A];[=]intron 61ADmildmilduvula bifida,myopia (acquired,mild)Vikkula (1995)
daughterCOL11A2:c.[4392 + 1 G > A];[=]intron 61normalnormalcleft palate
Son (U)COL11A2:c.[4392 + 1 G > A];[=]intron 61normalnormal
brotherCOL11A2:c.[4392 + 1 G > A];[=]intron 61moderatemildcleft palate
 mother COL11A2:c.[4392 + 1G > A];[=]intron 61moderatemoderate
CHARGE syndrome
#JHLB448probandCHD7:c.[808delG];[=]p.[A270fs];[=]exon 2spoadicprofoundprofoundcardiac malformation, laryngomalacia, lower cranial nerve disorder, colobomaSanlaville (2006)
mother (U)CHD7:c.[=];[=]p[=];[=]normalnormal
Jervell and Lange-Nielsen syndrome
JHLB4860probandKCNQ1: c.[1484_1485del];[520 C > T]p.[T495fs];[R174C]exon 11.exon 3ARmoderate(COR)bilateral superior canal dehiscenceNapolitano (2005),Donger (1997)
fatherKCNQ1: c.[520 C > T];[=]p.[R174C];[=]exon 3normalnormal
motherKCNQ1: c.[1484_1485del];[=]p.[T495fs];[=]exon 11normalnormal
Auditory neuropathy with optic atrophy
JHLB-2582probandOPA1: c.[892 A > C];[=]p.[S298R];[=]exon 9ADmoderatemoderateamblyopia childhood onset. optic nerve atrophythis study

U: Unaffected family member, AD: Autosomal dominant, AR: Autosomal recessive, COR: Conditioned orientation response audiometory.

The reference cDNA sequences NM_000088 for COL1A1, NM_001844 for COL2A1, NM_001854 for COL11A1, NM_080680 for COL11A2, NM_017780 for CHD7, NM_000218 for KCNQ1, NM_015560 for OPA1.

Table 6

Genetic diagnosis results and clinical features of Pendred syndrome patients.

ProbandNucleotide changeAmino Acid changeSeverity of hearing lossMalformation of inner earGoiter
Rt.(dB)Lt.(dB)
#752c.[919-2 A > G];[1652insT]c.[919-2 A > G];[1652insT]101.25103.75EVA+
#1045c.[2168 A > G];[2168 A > G]p[.H723R];[H723R]9098.75EVA, IP2+
#2010c.[2168 A > G];[601-1 G > A]p[.H723R];c.[601-1 G > A]77.596.25EVA+
#2331c.[2168 A > G];[2168 A > G]p[.H723R];[H723R]92.5102.5EVA+
#2538c.[2168 A > G];[2168 A > G]p[.H723R];[H723R]102.557.5EVA+
#2798c.[2168 A > G];[2168 A > G]p[.H723R];[H723R]56.2598.75EVA+
#3074c.[2168 A > G];[1707 + 5 G > A]p.[H723R];c.[1707 + 5 G > A]107.5107.5EVA+
#3994c.[2168 A > G];[601-1 G > A]p[.H723R];c.[601-1 G > A]NANAEVA+
#4386c.[2168 A > G];[2168 A > G]p[.H723R];[H723R]83.7592.5EVA+
#4486c.[1707+5 G > A];[1707 + 5 G > A]c.[1707 + 5 G > A];c.[1707 + 5 G > A]72.598.75EVA+
#4490c.[1229 C > T];[1229 C > T]p.[T410M];[T410M]92.597.5EVA+
#4545c.[2168 A > G];[1707 + 5 G > A]p.[H723R];c.[1707 + 5 G > A]9533.75EVA+
JHLB40c.[2168 A > G];[1707 + 5 G > A]p.[H723R];c.[1707 + 5 G > A]78.7576.25EVA+
JHLB401c.[2168 A > G];0.1707 + 5 G > Ap.[H723R];c.[1707 + 5 G > A]115107.5EVA+
JHLB427c.[1229 C > T];[1229 C > T]p.[T410M];[T410M]97.593.75EVA+
JHLB507c.[2168 A > G];[1229 C > T]p.[H723R];[T410M]8062.5EVA+
JHLB572c.[2168 A > G];[1229 C > T]p.[H723R];[T410M]108.25111.25EVA+
JHLB575c.[1579 A > C];[1707 + 5 G > A]p.[T527P];c.[1707 + 5 G > A]11077.5EVA+
JHLB915c.[2168 A > G];[367 C > T]p.[H723R];[P123S]115115EVA+
JHLB1392c.[2168 A > G];[601-1 G > A]p.[H723R];c.[601-1 G > A]111.25100EVA+
JHLB1790c.[2168 A > G];[147 C > G]p.[H723R];[S49R]82.593.75EVA+
JHLB2150c.[2168 A > G];[919-2 A > G]p.[H723R];c.[919-2 A > G]10591.25EVA+
JHLB2286c.[2168 A > G];[919-2 A > G]p.[H723R];c.[919-2 A > G]108.75112.5EVA+
JHLB2485c.[1579 A > C];[1229 C > T]p.[T527P];p.[T410M]NANAEVA+
JHLB2571c.[2168 A > G];[919-2 A > G]p.[H723R];c.[919-2 A > G]100115EVA+
JHLB2849c.[2168 A > G];[1001 + 1 G > A]p.[H723R];c.[1001 + 1 G > A]97.552.5EVA+
JHLB2857c.[2168 A > G];[919-2 A > G]p.[H723R];c.[919-2 A > G]107.5113.75EVA+
JHLB3229c.[2168 A > G];[1652insT]p.[H723R];c.[1652insT]102.558.75EVA+
JHLB3735c.[1343 C > T];[1229 C > T]p.[S448L];[T410M]53.7558.75EVA, IP2+
JHLB4048c.[2168 A > G];[1229 C > T]p.[H723R];[T410M]96.25105EVA, IP2+
JHLB4679c.[2168 A > G];[1648insT]p.[H723R];c.[1648insT]78.7567.5EVA+
JHLB4876c.[1174 A > T];[2162 C > T]p.[N392Y];[T721M]105105EVA+

The reference cDNA sequence NM_000441 for SLC26A4.

Genetic diagnosis results and clinical features of osteogenesis imperfecta, spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita, Stickler syndrome, Jervell Lange-Nielsen syndrome and auditory neuropathy with optic atrophy patients and family members. U: Unaffected family member, AD: Autosomal dominant, AR: Autosomal recessive, COR: Conditioned orientation response audiometory. The reference cDNA sequences NM_000088 for COL1A1, NM_001844 for COL2A1, NM_001854 for COL11A1, NM_080680 for COL11A2, NM_017780 for CHD7, NM_000218 for KCNQ1, NM_015560 for OPA1. Genetic diagnosis results and clinical features of Pendred syndrome patients. The reference cDNA sequence NM_000441 for SLC26A4. The proband with spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita had a novel truncating variant in COL2A1. She and her father, who harbored the same variant, had characteristic clinical features (cleft palate, short stature and short extremities). Their hearing level was severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. With regard to Stickler syndrome, we identified pathogenic variants in the COL11A1 (two cases) and COL11A2 (one case) genes. All identified variants were truncating (two were splice site, one was frameshift), with the two variants in COL11A1 being novel. One COL11A1 and one COL11A2 variant were identified from an autosomal dominant family, and one COL11A1 variant was identified from a sporadic case (de novo). As to the clinical features of the probands and all family members harboring the same causative gene variants (8 patients in total), hearing loss was observed in 75% of cases (3/3 with COL11A1 variants, 3/5 with COL11A2 variants), with the severity of hearing loss being mild to moderate. Two children of the proband with a COL11A2 variant (JHLB4181) carried the same variant but had normal hearing. Seventy-five percent of cases (6/8) had a cleft palate or uvula bifida (3/3 with COL11A1 variants, 3/5 with COL11A2 variants), and all three cases with COL11A1 variants had congenital myopia. One case harboring a COL11A2 variant, who was the son of the proband, had no symptoms. A novel OPA1 variant was identified in one case who suffered auditory neuropathy with optic atrophy. Two other pathogenic amino acid substitutions have been previously identified in the same position. The proband had amblyopia since infancy, and bilateral moderate sensorineural hearing loss. OAE (Otoacoustic emission) presented a normal response, the ABR (Auditory Brainstem Response) threshold was out of scale, and MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) showed bilateral cochlear nerve hypoplasia. The proband’s mother had similar symptoms (no DNA sample was available). With regard to Pendred syndrome, we identified SLC26A4 variants in 32 probands with autosomal recessive inheritance or sporadic cases. No variants in KCNJ10 and FOXI1 were identified in cases with heterozygous SLC26A4 variants.

Discussion

In this study, we conducted a comprehensive analysis of Japanese syndromic hearing loss patients to clarify mutation spectrums and clinical features by using NGS analysis with a multiple syndromic targeted resequencing panel. This analysis had a high diagnostic rate (56%) and was suitable for comprehensive analysis. Further, it allowed us to clarify the types and frequency of causative genes in Japanese syndromic hearing loss patients. In addition, it was particularly useful in cases that only partially fulfilled the respective diagnostic criteria. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study using targeted resequencing panel analysis for multiple syndromic hearing loss patients. With regard to BO/BOR syndrome, the causative variants were identified in 32% (19/59) of probands (16 typical, 43 atypical). The diagnostic rate was increased to 75% when we restricted the analysis to typical BO/BOR cases (12/16). Krug et al. reported the results of genetic analysis for a large number of BO/BOR patients and identified the causative variants in 36% of cases. Similar to this study, the diagnostic rate was increased to 76% when they restricted subjects to typical BO/BOR cases[28]. Unzaki et al. analyzed 36 Japanese families with clinically diagnosed BO/BOR syndrome and identified causative genes in 72% of them[29]. Thus, the diagnostic rate in this study was similar to the rates in these previous reports. EYA1 variants account for 95% of the causative gene variants identified in this study. Similarly, EYA1 was commonly identified in BO/BOR cases in previous studies; 85% in Japanese patients[29] and 93% in French patients[28]. SIX1 variants were identified in 5% (1/19) of the genetically diagnosed cases in this study. This percentage was similar to the results of previous reports[28,29]. No causative gene variants were identified in 25% of the typical BO/BOR syndrome cases in this study. There is a possibility that variants in other genes (such as SALL1) or genomic rearrangement (inversion or translocation in chromosome 8) may contribute to these cases. In this study, we also identified one copy number loss with a 2.8 Mb deletion of 8q13.2-q13.3 including the EYA1 gene in one familial case. The frequency of one copy number loss of the EYA1 gene was 6% (1/18) in this study. In other reports, copy number loss of the EYA1 gene was also involved in BO/BOR syndrome, with 7% to 10% or more of cases caused by EYA1 copy number loss[28,29]. The most frequent clinical feature was hearing loss, which was observed in 97% of cases (31/32), followed by preauricular pits in 88% (29/33). In other reports, the most frequent clinical feature was also hearing loss; however, the frequencies of other symptoms varied, with the frequency of renal symptoms higher in some reports[28-30]. Chen et al. reported renal anomalies in 67% of affected individuals[31], with about 6% of them progressing to renal failure[32]. Some of them were asymptomatic in the first decade but required dialysis or renal transplantation in adulthood[33,34]. In this study, only one case showed congenital renal anomalies. One plausible reason for this lower rate of renal anomalies was that we enrolled BO/BOR candidate patients, and information regarding renal anormalies was available for only a limited number of patients (renal ultrasonographic information was available for only 7/34 cases). Therefore, more cases may have had renal symptoms. In cases in which BO/BOR syndrome is suspected clinically or genetically, even in the absence of renal dysfunction in early childhood, renal examination may be important. It is noteworthy that three cases from two unrelated families with EYA1 variants presented visual symptoms (progressive disturbance of vision, amblyopia and hypermetropia), but visual symptoms are not typically associated with BOR syndrome. EYA1 is needed for the formation of the anterior portion of the eye[35]. Azuma et al. reported one case who presented with congenital cataracts with a BOR phenotype (cervical fistula, unilateral multicystic kidney and conductive hearing loss due to ossicular malformations), and others have also reported cases with visual symptoms (dysopia, cataract, micrognathia, and iris coloboma)[28,29,36-38]. The frequency of amblyopia is reported to be 3.0% to 3.2% in the general population[39,40], but the frequency of visual symptoms in the EYA1-related BO/BOR patients in this study was a little higher (9%). There is a possibility that visual symptoms actually represent a rare clinical feature of BO/BOR syndrome. Waardenburg syndrome was subdivided into four types based on the clinical findings, and each causative gene was identified. We successfully identified the genetic causes in 80% of WS1 probands (4/5), 71% of WS2 probands (10/14), and 100% of WS4 probands (2/2). Hoth et al. reported that point mutations in PAX3 have been identified in more than 90% of affected individuals with WS1 or WS3[41,42]. In this study, we identified one case each with MITF and SOX10 variants from WS1. MITF and SOX10 variants were generally identified from WS2 or WS4 patients. Similarly, MITF, EDNRB, and SOX10 variants were identified from WS1 patients in previous reports[42-44]. The cause of this inconsistency between phenotype and genotype may be 1) a new genotype-phenotype correlation or 2) the wider distance between the inner canthus in the Japanese population. In the Japanese literature, Motomura reported the inter-inner canthal, inter-outer canthal and inter-pupillary distance for each age group among Japanese (published in Japanese)[45]. It appears that the W-index calculated from these data may exceed 1.95 in many age groups (Supplementary Fig. S5). In future, it may be necessary to consider ethnic differences when evaluating the W-index. Among the WS2 cases, we identified the causative variants in 29% of cases with MITF, in 36% with SOX10, and in 7% with EDNRB. Pingault et al. reported that MITF mutations were involved in about 15% of cases, 15% with SOX10, and EDNRB and SNAI2 are a small percentage among WS2 patients[46]. Bocángel et al. reported that MITF variants and SOX10 variants were observed in 12% and 20% of South-eastern Brazilian WS2 cases, respectively[47]. Sun et al. also reported that the rates of causative genes observed in Chinese WS2 cases were 34% for MITF and 45% for SOX10, respectively[48]. Taken together, these results indicate that SOX10 variants may be more frequently identified in East Asian WS2 cases. It is worth noting that we also identified one copy number loss of the SOX10 gene using NGS read depth data and confirmed by aCGH in three cases. Two probands had a large deletion within the chromosome 22q13.1, a proband had the whole SOX10 gene deletion, and the other proband in a familial case had a partial deletion of SOX10. To date, more than 20 cases caused by copy number variation in PAX3 or SOX10 have been reported[42,47,49-54]. We identified one SOX10-assiociated WS case with developmental delay and one with Asperger syndrome. Both of these cases carried truncation variants; however, no cases were observed with developmental delay among the SOX10 CNV cases. Thus, the association between genotype and developmental delay phenotype remains unclear. In addition, we also identified one familial WS case with variations in phenotype among family members. In the MITF family (JHLB1623), the father had only unilateral hearing loss and excessive freckles, and her younger brother had only bilateral severe sensorineural hearing loss, but both had the same variant. It is usually difficult to suspect WS from clinical findings and family history; therefore, the comprehensive syndromic hearing loss panel was useful in such cases who only partially fulfilled the diagnostic criteria. In conclusion, this analysis using NGS with a multiple syndromic targeted resequencing panel was useful for identifying the causative genes in multiple syndromic hearing loss patients in a short time and with a high diagnostic rate.

Subjects and Methods

Subjects

In this study we enrolled total 140 probands with possible syndromic hearing loss who carried hearing loss with one or more associated symptoms typical of each syndrome from our hearing loss cohort of 5,137 patients gathered from 67 cooperative research institutes in Japan as described elsewhere[55] (Detailed numbers for each syndrome are listed in Table 2). We also collected data on the hearing level of each proband and their family members. The severity of hearing was classified as mild (20–40 dB), moderate (41–70 dB), severe (71–95 dB), or profound (>95 dB). With regard to BO/BOR syndrome, we enrolled the patients who fulfilled the criteria (typical and atypical) described previously[4]. Regarding auditory neuropathy, the probands with pathogenic variants in OTOF and DFNB59 were excluded from this study. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients or their guardians. This study was approved by the Shinshu University Ethical Committee as well as the respective Ethical Committees of the other participating institutions listed below. Akita University Ethical Committee, Iwate Medical University Ethical Committee, Tohoku Rosai Hospital Ethical Committee, Fukushima Medical University Ethical Committee, Yamagata University Ethical Committee, Dokkyo Medical University Ethical Committee, TAKASAKI Ear Nose & Throat Clinic Ethical Committee, Niigata University Ethical Committee, Tokyo Medical University Ethical Committee, Jikei University Ethical Committee, Toranomon Hospital Ethical Committee, Kitasato University Ethical Committee, International University of Health and Welfare Mita Hospital Ethical Committee, National Rehabilitation Center for Persons with Disabilities Ethical Committee, Keio University Ethical Committee, Hamamatsu University Ethical Committee, Shiga University Ethical Committee, Shiga Medical Center for Children Ethical Committee, Osaka University Ethical Committee, Kobe City Medical Center General Hospital Ethical Committee, Hyogo College of Medicine Ethical Committee, Kyoto Prefectural University Ethical Committee, Okayama University Ethical Committee, Yamaguchi University Ethical Committee, Ehime University Ethical Committee, Kyushu University Ethical Committee, Kanda ENT Clinic Ethical Committee, Nagasaki University Ethical Committee, Miyazaki University Ethical Committee, Kagoshima University Ethical Committee, Ryukyus University Ethical Committee, Sapporo Medical University Ethical Committee, Tohoku University Ethical Committee, Jichi Medical University Ethical Committee, Gunma University Ethical Committee, Jyuntendo University Ethical Committee, Yokohama City University Ethical Committee, Mejiro University Ethical Committee, Saitama Medical University Ethical Committee, Abe ENT Clinic Ethical Committee, Tokyo Medical Center Institute of Sensory Organs Ethical Committee, Jichi University Saitama Medical Center Ethical Committee, Aichi Children’s Health Medical Center Ethical Committee, Chubu Rosai Hospital Ethical Committee, Kyoto University Ethical Committee, Mie University Ethical Committee, Kansai Medical University Ethical Committee, Kobe University Ethical Committee, Osaka Medical Center and Research Institute for Maternal and Children Health Ethical Committee, Wakayama Medical University Ethical Committee, Kouchi University Ethical Committee, Hiroshima University Ethical Committee, Hiroshima City Hiroshima Citizen Hospital Ethical Committee, Fukuoka University Ethical Committee, Kurume University Ethical Committee, National Defense Medical College Ethical Committee, Tokai University Ethical Committee, Hokkaido University Ethical Committee, Kanagawa Children’s Medical Center Ethical Committee, Tokyo Medical and Dental University Ethical Committee, Hirosaki University Ethical Committee, Tokyo Metropolitan Children’s Medical Center Ethical Committee, Hakodate Central General Hospital Ethical Committee, Osaka Red Cross Hospital Ethical Committee, Hiroshima Prefectural Hospital Ethical Committee, Nara Medical University Ethical Committee, Tsukuba University Ethical Committee. All methods were performed in accordance with the Guidelines for Genetic Tests and Diagnoses in Medical Practice of the Japanese Association of Medical Sciences and the Declaration of Helsinki as required by Shinshu University.

Methods

Amplicon Library Preparation

An Amplicon library was prepared with an Ion AmpliSeqTM Custom Panel (Applied Biosystems, Life Technologies) for 36 target genes reported to cause syndromic hearing loss. We selected the 36 genes associated with 14 types of syndromic hearing loss commonly observed in practical settings. We also referred to the hereditary hearing loss homepage (https://hereditaryhearingloss.org) to select these genes. The responsible genes for Usher syndrome were not included in our syndromic hearing loss targeting panel as these genes were included in the non-syndromic hearing loss panel reported in a previous paper[55]. To avoid any overlap between these two panels, we removed the genes associated with Usher syndrome from our panel. The panel contained the following genes: EYA1-SIX1-SIX5 for BOR syndrome; PAX3-MITF-SNAI2-EDNRB-EDN3-SOX10 for Waardenburg syndrome; COL2A1-COL11A1-COL11A2-COL9A1-COL9A2-COL9A3-COL1A1-COL4A3-COL4A4-COL4A5 for connective tissue disorder including osteogenesis imperfecta, spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita, Stickler syndrome, and Alport syndrome; CHD7-SEMA3E for CHRGE syndrome; SLC26A4- FOXI1-KCNJ10 for Pendred syndrome; KCNQ1-KCNE1 for Jervell Lange-Nielsen syndrome; NDP for Norrie disease; TCOF1-POLR1C for Treacher-Collins syndrome, HSD17B4-HARS2-CLPP-LARS2 for Perrault syndrome; OPA1 for auditory neuropathy with optic atrophy and GDF6-MEOX1 for Klippel Feil syndrome.

Emulsion PCR and sequencing

The emulsion PCR and NGS (next-generation sequencing) were performed with an Ion Proton system using the Ion Proton 200 sequencing Kit and an Ion P1 Chip (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

Base call and data analysis

The sequence data were mapped against the human genome sequence (build GRCh37/hg19) with the Torrent Mapping Alignment Program. After sequencing mapping, the DNA variant regions were piled up with Torrent Variant Caller plug-in software. After variant detection, variant effects were analyzed using the ANNOVAR software[56,57].

Direct sequencing

After the filtering process, described previously[55], we performed confirmation of the identified variant and family segregation analysis by Sanger sequencing.

CNV (Copy Number Variation) analysis

CNV analysis was performed with NGS analysis read depth data according to the method described in a previous report[58].

aCGH (Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization)

To confirm the CNVs identified from NGS read depth data, we performed array CGH analysis with the Agilent 8 × 60 K whole genome array (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA). We used the same DNA samples as for the amplicon re-sequencing, and quality assessment was also carried out. Ten microliters of genomic DNA solution (0.5ug of DNA) were fragmented, labeled with cyanine-3 for reference DNA samples and cyanine-5 for subjects, and then hybridized. Scanning of the array was carried out according to the manufacturer’s recommended protocols. Scanned aCGH data were analyzed using CytoGenomics software version 3.0.6.6 (Agilent Technologies). Table S1, Table S2, Figure S1, Figure S2, Figure S3, Figure S4, Figure S5
  8 in total

1.  Compound heterozygous variants of the SLC26A4 gene in a Chinese family with enlarged vestibular aqueducts.

Authors:  Xiaohui He; Shaozhi Zhao; Lin Shi; Yitong Lu; Yintong Yang; Xinwen Zhang
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2022-07-08       Impact factor: 3.622

2.  Novel SOX10 Mutations in Waardenburg Syndrome: Functional Characterization and Genotype-Phenotype Analysis.

Authors:  Supranee Thongpradit; Natini Jinawath; Asif Javed; Laran T Jensen; Issarapa Chunsuwan; Kitiwan Rojnueangnit; Thipwimol Tim-Aroon; Krisna Lertsukprasert; Meng-Shin Shiao; Nongnuch Sirachainan; Duangrurdee Wattanasirichaigoon
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2020-12-09       Impact factor: 4.599

3.  Pendred Syndrome, or Not Pendred Syndrome? That Is the Question.

Authors:  Paola Tesolin; Sofia Fiorino; Stefania Lenarduzzi; Elisa Rubinato; Elisabetta Cattaruzzi; Lydie Ammar; Veronica Castro; Eva Orzan; Claudio Granata; Daniele Dell'Orco; Anna Morgan; Giorgia Girotto
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 4.096

4.  Lights and Shadows in the Genetics of Syndromic and Non-Syndromic Hearing Loss in the Italian Population.

Authors:  Anna Morgan; Stefania Lenarduzzi; Beatrice Spedicati; Elisabetta Cattaruzzi; Flora Maria Murru; Giulia Pelliccione; Daniela Mazzà; Marcella Zollino; Claudio Graziano; Umberto Ambrosetti; Marco Seri; Flavio Faletra; Giorgia Girotto
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2020-10-22       Impact factor: 4.096

5.  Sensorineural Hearing Loss and Mitochondrial Apoptosis of Cochlear Spiral Ganglion Neurons in Fibroblast Growth Factor 13 Knockout Mice.

Authors:  Yulou Yu; Jing Yang; Feng Luan; Guoqiang Gu; Ran Zhao; Qiong Wang; Zishan Dong; Junming Tang; Wei Wang; Jinpeng Sun; Ping Lv; Hailin Zhang; Chuan Wang
Journal:  Front Cell Neurosci       Date:  2021-06-16       Impact factor: 5.505

6.  Phenotype-genotype correlation in patients with typical and atypical branchio-oto-renal syndrome.

Authors:  Masatsugu Masuda; Ayako Kanno; Kiyomitsu Nara; Hideki Mutai; Naoya Morisada; Kazumoto Iijima; Noriko Morimoto; Atsuko Nakano; Tomoko Sugiuchi; Yasuhide Okamoto; Sawako Masuda; Sayaka Katsunuma; Kaoru Ogawa; Tatsuo Matsunaga
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-01-19       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  There Is More Than Meets the Eye: Identification of Dual Molecular Diagnosis in Patients Affected by Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Anna Morgan; Flavio Faletra; Giulia Severi; Martina La Bianca; Laura Licchetta; Paolo Gasparini; Claudio Graziano; Giorgia Girotto
Journal:  Biomedicines       Date:  2021-12-22

8.  Discovery of sensorineural hearing loss and ossicle deformity in a Chinese Li nationality family with spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita caused by p.G504S mutation of COL2A1.

Authors:  Kan Wu; Zhumei Li; Yuhua Zhu; Xiaocheng Wang; Guohui Chen; Zhaohui Hou; Qiujing Zhang
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2021-06-28       Impact factor: 3.063

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.